High-risk pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening disease state with current guidelines recommending reperfusion therapy with systemic thrombolytics in addition to anticoagulation. This was a prospective observational cohort study with a historical control group comparing tenecteplase to alteplase for the treatment of PE or cardiac arrest with suspected PE. The primary outcome was the incidence of institutional protocol deviations defined as incorrect thrombolytic dose administered or the incorrect product compounded. Secondary outcomes included any bleeding event, major bleeding event, all-cause mortality, and for patients with a cardiac arrest, successful return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Fifty-four patients were included in the study. Protocol deviations occurred in one patient receiving tenecteplase and one patient receiving alteplase (4.0% vs 3.4%; P = 1.0). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (80% vs 86.2%; P = .72), any bleed (12% vs 13.8%; P = 1.0), major bleed (8.0% vs 6.9%; P = 1.0), or ROSC achievement (22.2% vs 28.6%; P = .73) when comparing tenecteplase to alteplase. Our study demonstrates that tenecteplase may be an alternative thrombolytic to alteplase for treatment of PE or cardiac arrest with suspected PE. Further studies comparing the different systemic thrombolytic agents for PE or cardiac arrest with suspected PE are needed.
Keywords: PE; alteplase; cardiac arrest; pulmonary embolism; tenecteplase.